"The 5 Worst Things About the Techno-Libertarians Solidifying Their Grasp on Our Economy and Culture"
From naked capitalism:
Lambert here: That Silicon Valley catchphrase “Move fast and break
things” has always made my back teeth itch. So, what Eskow says here
most definitely needs to be said. I see no reason whatever to give
Silicon Valley squillionaires deference. We should stop doing that.
By RJ Eskow, a blogger and writer, a former Wall Street executive, a consultant, and a former musician. Originally published at Alternet.
Nowadays the Silicon Valley is either celebrated as a hotbed of
creativity or condemned as a cauldron of greed and wealth inequality.
While there are certainly some talented and even idealistic people in
the Valley, there’s also an excess of shallow libertarianism, from
people who have enriched themselves with government-created technology
who then decide they’re being held back by government. That’s
shortsighted and vain. And yes, there are serious problems with sexism
and age discrimination – problems which manifest themselves with some
ugly behavior.
But such ethical problems aren’t solely, or even primarily, the
product of individual character defects. They’re the result of
self-reinforcing cultural norms at work. Anthropologists and
sociologists could do worse than study the tech culture of the Silicon
Valley. It would be important work, in fact, because this insular
culture is having a deep and lasting impact on our economy and society.
Here, to star them off, are five socially destructive aspects of Silicon Valley culture:
1. Tech products become the byproducts of a money-making scheme rather than an end unto themselves.
It’s almost inevitable when big money enters the picture: Smart or
talented people are drawn to a field for the chance to get rich, not
necessarily because it’s where their greatest talents or dreams lie.
The same thing has happened to fields as diverse as film, pop music,
and the financial sector. There’s nothing wrong with getting rich, but
it should be the byproduct of a happy marriage between talent and
inspiration.
But here’s how it works instead: The goal of entrepreneurs and
innovators was once summed up in the cliched phrase, “build a better
mousetrap.” But for many Silicon Valley products and services,
including services like Uber and AirBnB, the goal now is to build a
product which can be hyped into a multi-billion-dollar valuation –
preferably by winning as much market share as possible, and then using
that market position to engage in the kinds of practices usually
reserved for monopolies and monopsonies (markets in which there is only
one buyer). This process is described in more detail here.
Instead of building a better mousetrap, the new Silicon Valley business model works like this:
i. Give your “mousetrap” away for free, or as close to free as you
can make it. (Since you’re working with digital signals transmitted over
a government-invented network, that can usually be done at minimal
cost. In other cases it pays to benefit from a government tax loophole
(see Amazon) or make an end run around the regulations your competitors
must follow (see Uber, Lyft, and AirBnB).
ii. Use these government-conferred advantages, along with your own
aggressive market moves, to gain a large or decisive marketshare. (See
Amazon, Facebook, etc.) In exceptional cases, actually build brilliant
and superior software to win your market share. (See Google.)
iii. Use your newfound market share to a) bend government to your
will wherever possible, b) screw down your suppliers’ prices, c) hit
your customers with increased prices and/or new ads or other
profit-making devices, and d) manipulate your customers without their
knowledge. (See Uber, Amazon, Google, Facebook, et al.)
This business model has directed much of the Valley’s efforts away
from inventing genuinely creative new products – and toward the kinds of
aggressive tactics that, as we’ve written before, would be very
familiar to the Robber Barons of the 19th century.
2. Even inspired leaders internalize a worldview which places profits over humane behavior.
Steve Jobs is a prime example of this phenomenon. As an early
innovator in the tech field, Jobs – however interested he was in making
money – was not drawn to the field for the sake of money alone. Nor was
he following in the footsteps of others, seeking to replicate the
successes of a Zuckerberg or a Sergey Brin, as newcomers to the field
are now. Jobs possessed a genuinely inspired design vision, from the
earliest days of his career to his last.
And yet, for all his gifts, the pursuit of wealth led Jobs to commit
some morally reprehensible deeds. As “white collar criminologist”
William K. Black Jr. told me in a 2012 radio interview,
Jobs’ drive to maximize profits – and his craving to get new products
to market as quickly as possible – almost certainly led him to knowingly
ignore abuses and safety threats to the Chinese workers who built his
products. That, in turn, led to dormitory-based workers being forced to
work under extreme conditions. These unheeded warnings also led to the
horrific burning deaths of several workers.
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos is also unquestionably an innovator. But the
working conditions which Amazon’s warehouse workers endure would seem
familiar to their Apple counterparts in China. As documented by Simon
Head in his book “Mindless: Why Smarter Machines Are Making Dumber
Humans” (excerpt here),
Amazon’s American warehouse workers are subjected to ever-harsher
production expectations and invasive measurement techniques. Head
documents the case of a Pennsylvania employee who worked 11-hour shifts
and was ultimately fired for “unproductive periods” which lasted only
minutes. GPS devices in an England warehouse tell workers which routes
they must travel – inside the warehouse – and their expected travel
time.
Amazon’s German operations employed “a security firm with alleged
neo-Nazi connections that … intimidated temporary workers lodged in a
company dormitory … with guards entering their rooms without permission
at all times of the day and night.” An Allentown facility which lacked
air conditioning repeatedly reached temperatures of more than 100
degrees one summer. More than fifteen workers collapsed, but supervisors
refused to open garage doors. Reports Head: “Calls to the local
ambulance service became so frequent that for five hot days in June and
July, ambulances and paramedics were stationed all day at the depot.”
A number of Silicon Valley CEOs were also implicated in a widespread
conspiracy to illegally suppress wages and prevent job-seeking from
engineers and other key employees. Mark Ames,
who has reported extensively on the conspiracy, wrote that
“confidential internal Google and Apple memos … clearly show that what
began as a secret cartel agreement between Apple’s Steve Jobs and
Google’s Eric Schmidt to illegally fix the labor market for hi-tech
workers, expanded within a few years to include companies ranging from
Dell, IBM, eBay and Microsoft, to Comcast, Clear Channel, Dreamworks,
and London-based public relations behemoth WPP.”
These incidents are by no means exceptions in the Silicon Valley
culture. The most generous way to interpret behavior like this is to
assume that Steve Jobs and operated in a culture whose worldview
downplayed the human impact of business practices. That, in fact, is
reinforced by other aspects of Silicon Valley’s leadership society.
3. The culture encourages a solipsistic detachment from
reality, even as its brute economic strength colonizes everything it
touches.
A dispassionate observer might be tempted to wonder how a culture
filled with so many smart people can remain so unaware of, and/or
disinterested in, their effect on other people’s lives?
For many of them, the evidence is literally right before their eyes:
San Francisco’s richness and diversity is being drained away, as the
city becomes unaffordable for more and more of its citizens. They are
all good with numbers, so the statistics on growing wealth inequality
should not be hard for them to understand. And their arguments – e.g.,
that the “sharing economy” will benefit struggling Americans – are
easily punctured by even a superficial look at US demographics. (Are
struggling Milwaukee residents going to get rich driving tourists around
their battered town, or renting out their inner-city apartments on
AirBnB?)...MORE